WHERE I STAND:

Some recent news items don’t make much sense

Sun, Apr 6, 2008 (2 a.m.)

Perhaps it is advancing age.

I don’t claim to be the hippest Baby Boomer on the block. In fact, I know there is still so much about practically everything there is to know that I still don’t know. And I understand that the challenge of life is to live and learn long enough so that the gap between what we do know and what we don’t becomes small enough to make us feel our time on Earth has not been wasted.

So it is in the spirit of wanting to comprehend that which I most certainly don’t understand that I ask the following three questions. If you know, I mean really know, the answers, my e-mail box is nearby and I would appreciate the knowledge. Otherwise, I am doomed to a life of continued frustration because of an inability to learn as I approach my own middle age.

First, since when in this great democracy does one side in a presidential race get to overwhelm the country with his narrative about how democracy works?

This is not a political judgment about Sen. Barack Obama. Rather, it is an indictment of the rest of us who have bought into the idea that with more than 4,000 delegate votes to be pledged heading into the Democratic National Convention, if one candidate is ahead by 100 or 150 — without reaching the majority needed for nomination — that he or she deserves to win. And yet that is the case being made.

The way I count, being ahead, but still behind the votes needed for a majority, by less than 2 or 3 percent of the total vote, is not the kind of landslide that should cause the entire Democratic Party, no matter how naive the Democrats want to be, to go rushing to one side or the other.

Likewise, being ahead in the popular vote by less than a couple of percentage points when all the votes are not properly counted — that’s a dig at the 2000 election when the U.S. Supreme Court prevented Florida from counting all the votes (tell me that’s not happening again) — doesn’t seem to create a compelling need for the Democrats to rush like lemmings to the water’s edge.

This is not about whether Obama or Clinton should be the party’s nominee; it is about concepts such as majority rule, independence of thought and the rule of reason trumping the rule of the mob. Forget who you like, please explain the logic.

Second, am I the only one who heard a report that the United States is not in the position to send any more troops to Afghanistan to fight al-Qaida or find Osama bin Laden this year? And that means we are not in any position to defend America in another war or on another front should the need arise.

I am not suggesting that we find another war to fight. It is just that when we tell the whole world how weak we are, and we refuse to do anything about our inability to field a fighting force, it doesn’t seem as if we are doing all we can to protect and defend the United States.

Again, I may be wrong or just getting too old to understand the new thinking, but please, if someone can explain why we don’t have enough fighting men and women when we know we need them, why should we tell our enemies and why don’t we do something about it?

And third, and much closer to home: I am all for developing this community in the highest and best way possible. But I am not sure that building another city hall for Las Vegas is the way to go about it.

I tried to understand the published reports and the new math that was taught at the last City Council meeting, but it just doesn’t compute in my aging brain how spending at least $100 million — and probably twice as much — for brand-new digs for the same old government will spur billions of dollars in new development.

It seems to me if the city fathers and mothers of Las Vegas want to do something really wise and fiscally sound, they would sell that building they are in downtown, and all the land around it, for the $50 million to $80 million they think it is worth, and give the money to Clark County.

That money would be used for two purposes. First, a small portion of it would be used to pay for an addition to the county building — say to house two or three new Clark County commissioners — and the rest would be put into a sinking fund that would offset whatever disparity there may be between city taxpayers and county taxpayers.

Yes, I am suggesting a latent Baby Boomer idea of consolidating city and county governments — again. Especially at a time when spending is being squeezed and services are disappearing as a result, it seems to me that consolidating government will save the taxpayers millions, billions and trillions over a few generations. It will also streamline government and spare us another fancy government building downtown.

Instead of all those phony initiatives being put on the ballot designed to hoodwink voters into thinking there really is a free lunch, why not ask us if we want to pay the cost of two governments when one will more than adequately do the trick?

So, there you have it. Am I really so far past my prime that I just don’t understand the new ways? Or am I finally old enough and wise enough to have figured a couple of things out?

I am certain someone will let me know.

Brian Greenspun is editor of the Las Vegas Sun.

Discussion: 5 comments so far…

By mikeg

4/6/08 at 10:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Nice points sir, great to see some conventional wisdom challenged.

A sidenote: all that money for a new city hall would buy some nice city parks that might reduce the stress levels of city residents, even if they only spent a fraction of what is earmarked for a shiny new municipal trophy case. More trees. More calm quiet places to walk and cool off after a hectic work day. Might that reduce the overall angst that permeates the city, and help everyone?
By Johnathan_Abbinett

4/7/08 at 12:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

In answer to your first question: Since the media stopped doing news and decided it was far more profitable to produce entertaining "spin" - and didn't this same problem occur in the 2000 race, and more recently, in the excitement of rushing into an Unjust War in Iraq?

In answer to your second question: Yes, many in the Military and Veterans Community noticed and have been raising the issue of troop strength and equipment needs for several years now. As most of your readers probably don't know the difference between a soldier and a marine, let's do a little, basic review of history.

America has a Department of DEFENSE comprised of the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force and Coast Guard. There is an Active Duty Component for each that is for missions outside CONUS (Continental United States) to be utilized in humanitarian missions and Just Wars only as a last resort. The Active Duty Component also have a Reserve Component to augment them in times of personnel shortages - and our National Guard were formed to remain at home and provide for our domestic security needs (you know, as in guarding the nation) - they, too, have been exhausted in this ill conceived, unnecessary, immoral, unethical and illegal Unjust War in Iraq!

BTW: The Reserves and National Guard originally were designed to serve only one weekend a month and two weeks a year and no more than 179 days on Active Duty per year - but, those days are now long gone since we no longer honor the Founders and the requirements they set out to ensure America only goes into Just Wars as an absolute last resort. Today, war is about politicians posing as patriots and sending other people's children into harms way for mammouth corporate profits - it's all about the money, oil money, contracting money, sub-contracting money, money, Money, MONEY!

Besides, how else is the best way to raise a group of private, politically (mis)directed, corporate controlled army then to first break the back of America's military? Hey, then we could use those statistics to prop up some stupid argument about turning only 3 relatively small Military Professional Contracting Corporations into over 3,000 - and produce more mammouth profits for the rich!

Bottom Line: We had every right to go after the real terrorist of 911 in Afghanistan, and we do have the legal right to pursue them into Pakistan - but, gee, now we can't even finish that legitimate mission because of Bush's blunder in Iraq! Well, that's O.K., maybe the media will help the Republicans just spin the facts and come up with some convoluted campaign, and archaic candidate, to keep us in Iraq for another hundred years!

After all only about 5% of Americans are serving in the military and directly sacrificing. The rest of you - just go shopping!

Maybe some aspiring journalists should do a series of stories titled: "It's the war stupid AND the economy!"
By harske

4/7/08 at 1:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Oh Mr. Greenspun... you poor, poor man. Did I really read this correctly? Did you really just pose serious questions about politics from a common sense point of view? Surely you have realized by now that there is no larger oxy-moron than that.

On a more serious note, I had such high hopes that politics (and the world) would change in my lifetime, but I'm losing faith more and more. Am I the only one in this great country downright insulted by the facts that we have people with children living under overpasses, we have 25,000 families in the gulf states still living in temporary housing after hurricane Katrina, and 1 in 5 american kids is malnourished and uneducated... all while the 3 main candidates vying for a $250k a year job raise tens of millions of dollars a month for political campaigning?! Talk about misappropriation of funds. Imagine if they would apply themselves towards raising the same kind of money for the real problems. But that wouldn't work, would it? I'm sure donations would drop. Sad, sad state of affairs if you ask me.

I don't really have an answer for you Brian, but I for one simply appreciate you asking the questions. Hopefully if you continue to ask, with your stature you'll help make enough people actually think about the more important things going on, and we'll see some progress.

Keep up the great work.
By seslew

4/8/08 at 10:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

Remember when people used to say "There is no such thing as a stupid question?" There are such things as stupid questions and let me give two examples. When someone who you know or work with pretends they need to ask you something they already know the answer to so that they can advance some agenda, that is a stupid question.
Likewise, when a very educated man who has strong opinons pretnds to ask questions so that he can write commentary and espouse those opinions that is a stupid question. But I have a question, If the writer uses this tired old trick to try to gain attention to his opinions is the question stupid or the writer?
By Johnathan_Abbinett

4/8/08 at 12:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Here's the deal - it's about the fundamental skill to do basic research and exercise deductive logic - so, let's get real! Having an open mind and asking the right questions is absolutely essential to eventually arriving at the best conclusions - and keeping an open, systematically and scientific analysis is important in growing and moving forward.

Everyone should have an agenda and be upfront about it - sadly, too many don't even have a plan for their own life, let alone a personal agenda, or even the ability to manage their time and their own personal calendar!

"When someone who you know or work with pretends they need to ask you something they already know the answer to..." - maybe they are just trying to ascertain, for sure, what YOU know (or feel, or believe on the subject) before they waste any valuable time with someone that hasn't been fully educated in deductive logic? Maybe, they're just trying to initially broach the subject politely to determine if you're even interested?

That is not stupid - it's just recognizing how dumb downed most people have become under our failing educational system! Remember the old saying "When we assume, we risk making an ASS out of U and ME?" Painting the questions of others with the broad brush of stupidity belies one's insecurity and lack of self-esteem in their own intelligence doesn't it?

It's not your fault if you don't understand how to utilize a basic skill such as logic - it IS your responsibility and fault if you fail to take corrective action!

The best writers ask good questions, then pose logical conclusions and their most reasonable solutions to spur dialogue - and they are usually very humble in recognizing their limited knowledge and vast ignorance. To do anything less would be stupid!

What scares me most is stupid people that spell stupid S-T-O-O-P-U-D, and the growing number of "felony stoopud" people!